A lot of explaining to do...

There sure is a lot of explaining going on by Autosport - I just looked at the right hand side column on the main page and noticed the beginnings of articles. The top five of seven use very similar wording.

"Auto GP season produced a surprise champion in teenager Kevin Ceccon and action and excitement all the way to the Mugello title decider, as Andrew van de Burgt explains..."

"Without opposition to Max Mosley's blueprint for F1 in 2009, there wouldn't have been a FOTA or an RRA. Dieter Rencken explains how his influence is still being felt..."

"Much of the 2013 driver market hinges on a man who has yet to prove he can race in F1 again - Robert Kubica. Jonathan Noble explains why the Pole's comeback could yet be in a Ferrari..."

"The 2011 F2 season provided a lesson in domination from Mirko Bortolotti - the Italian sweeping to seven wins and 14 podium finishes, as Sam Tremayne explains..."

"Kimi Raikkonen looks certain to quit the WRC and return to F1 next year. But, as David Evans explains, he will be missed by a sport that was only just getting to know him."

Repetitive use of the same verb indicates a certain lack of imagination. Also I personally find the word slightly patronising in its implication that we the readers know absolutely nothing about the subject and have to have it all 'explained' to us.